I’ve been involved in a few campaigns against the sexualisation of girls, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen a company act on complaints as quickly as this one did.
On Tuesday I posted a blog about a ‘tweenage’ push-up bra sold at Best & Less. A number of people got active and wrote to the company to protest. Adolescent psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg was one of them. Here’s his letter (warning, anyone offended by the term ‘cretin’ should not read further):
I am a child and adolescent psychologist who has worked for 25 years in the field. I am incandescent with rage with the bone brained individual in your company who thought it would be a brilliant idea to sell push up bras to prepubescent girls!
There are so many reasons why this runs counter to what we know is in the best interests of young girls – it is difficult to know where to start.
I can only refer you to the American Psychological Society Taskforce report on the impact of early sexualisation and hope that you reprimand the cretin who made this decision and immediately withdraw the product.
Sincerely
Dr Michael Carr-Gregg
Then I received this response from Best & Less.
Dear Melinda,
We are writing to you regarding your recent blog and comments relating to bras labelled “Tweenage”.
Best & Less prides itself on its strong family values and has strict guidelines relating to the sale of products for young people. As such Best & Less does not stock or sell push up bras for children.
The bras in question were intended to be a women’s petites range from sizes 8AA through to 12B. They were made to current Australian standards for women’s bras and were displayed in our women’s underwear department. Regrettably an error resulted in the incorrect branding and labeling of these bras as ‘Tweenage’. As a consequence, they were removed from sale in all of our stores across Australia as of yesterday, 2nd February.
We have taken procedural steps to avoid any future branding or labeling errors of this sort.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Christine Ryan
Best & Less
That’s one hell of an error in the branding and labeling department. But the company has at least responded to community concern and acted quickly, unlike others who have featured on this blog (responses from Roger David: zero).
I hope all of you who have taken any kind of action against corporate sexploitation will be encouraged by this outcome.
13 Responses
So collective shout is working. Thanks for protecting my daughters. I am still a waiting to see if they Best and Less stand by what they say they will do. Once bitten twice shy on these companies.
How satisfying.
I’m thrilled that they were so responsive on this and have removed the bras. But really, a labelling “error?” Like that “tweenage” logo wasn’t something they thought long and hard about, got a designer to create a logo for and checked and double checked.
The “women’s petite range from size 8AA through to 12B.” I believe these bras are still intended for young girls, they’re just not going to advertise as such with words like “tweenage.”
This is an excellent result (pending that it happens of course).
I received that response from Best & Less as well first thing this morning (I sent the email after midnight) so at least it shows they are taking this seriously.
It definitely sounds fishy that it was a “labelling” error, but regardless, at least they are being removed!
I’m sorry – intended to be a women’s petite range with a ‘regrettable error’?
Like the marketing department doesn’t check, double check, triple check the details on EVERYTHING before it goes to the printers?
Because gaffes like this don’t result in HUGE costs to the company due to withdraws and reprints?
Like the word ‘TWEENAGE’, and the kiddy-style labelling and design is so TEENY as to be something only too easy to miss?
Gimme a break.
I hereby withdraw my admiration for their swift action, then.
It’s great that they’re withdrawing the bras. Let’s not get too het up with criticism about them not noticing it in the first place, let’s give credit where it’s due. Nobody’s perfect (especially not me).
This is an excellent outcome!
Thank you ‘Best and Less’ for acting promptly.
I hope you are not going to do what ‘Target ‘did with the sexualised Kylie Minogue Holeproof underwear for 8 year old girls a couple of years ago – that is make a statement to withdraw, but in fact put the items out on ‘sale’.
Likewise ‘Supre’ who made a statement to withdraw ‘Santas Bitch’ and ‘North Pole Dancer’ t-shirts, but in fact put them out as sale items.
I am aware that ‘Cotton On’ is currently withdrawing 42,000 pieces of inappropriate slogan t-shirts from their stores nationwide – that is responsible action!
Hi Jane,
Look I agree with you in part, that ultimately they withdrew them and that’s fantastic. But they are being misleading in their responses. When you look at what time and effort goes into branding, choosing a designer and a logo and as another poster above said, checking, double checking time and money etc. there is no way they didn’t “notice” this. This is their business! There is no way that this wasn’t a deliberate decision to stock this item. They should have given an honest response which would have looked more like this. “This was an error in judgement, we will review our policies.” I’m not perfect either Jane, but when we make mistakes we need to be honest and accountable and I just don’t think Best and Less are being honest here when they call it a “labelling” error.
I hear you, Jane. I’m very probably less perfect than you again!
But to be honest, I’m tired of the spin.
I’m certainly thrilled that Best & Less pulled the range. But I have to say I’m looking forward to the day that manufacturers, retailers, marketers and governments respond to public concern with honesty, responsibility and real commitment to healthy media environments instead of excuses, buck-passing, parent-blaming, or nothing at all.
It’s fairly commonplace for brands (or media outlets, for that matter) to ‘push the envelope’ too far in order to offend, and therefore attract the attention of interest and rights groups. Controversy attracts attention, more visibility (and more $$) in an otherwise cluttered media environment. (Check out critiques of Calvin Klein’s advertising history.)
This situation will continue as long as the systems to protect kids from these kinds of totally inappropriate products and/or media messages are inadequate and ineffectual. And all the while, our children grow up with skewed and unhealthy ideas about their bodies, their rights, their relationships, and their roles within them.
A fantastic outcome, Melinda and others! Congratulations!
(But Julie is quite correct, we should keep an eye out for ‘sales’ of the offending material – this does not count as withdrawn from sale.)
this is a very late reply to this post and so likely won’t get read, but i felt i needed to say it. while i agree that sexualising of girls and marketing unnecessary bras to pre-pubescent kids is wrong, getting the line completely withdrawn means that someone like me (mid 20s but i wear an 8aa) has even less opportunity to find underwear that fits. it is already humiliating enough to have to buy bras with tags that say ‘my first bra’, but to now have something that – from the picture at least – looked reasonable and more ‘grown up’ than just about anything i’ve ever found withdrawn from sale means someone my size has virtually nowhere to shop. best and less have been one of the few places to stock small sizes and i’d hate for that to change because of overzealousness on the part of children’s advocates. i know that isn’t what you are intending to do, but that can be the result. if you don’t believe me, go shopping for an 8aa bra – you’ll soon see that these tween bras – while labelled horribly – are pretty much all there is.
I found Best & Less last year selling in their Tween fashions a tight, short fake leather black mini skirt. Not a good look on a six year old!